388 replies to this topic

[Dr Roshima]

yeah, in MWLL they ´re the best weapons against hovercrafts, Vtrol, Aeros and BAs..
But MWO won´t have them.

How about making the AC2/5 something like a "manual AMS" for shooting down LRMs ?

yeah, in MWLL they ´re the best weapons against hovercrafts, Vtrol, Aeros and BAs..
But MWO won´t have them.

How about making the AC2/5 something like a "manual AMS" for shooting down LRMs ?

[MaddMaxx]

Hey, come on man! Some "guys" like to use them as AMS systems. Shooting down LRM clusters like Billy the Kid did Town Sheriff's.

[Korbyn McColl]

pursang, on 13 April 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

Well, unfortunately MWO won't have any light vehicles for you to "pepper".

Not that you can pilot. But I don't think we've heard whether or not they will be in game as cannon fodder. It would be pretty cool if there was a command module that allowed you to call in vehicle/air support.

[Omigir]

Mason Grimm, on 13 April 2012 - 04:24 AM, said:

I gotta say I disagree...

AC2 and AC5, while not very high damage weapons, allow a player to sit at an extremely long range and plink away. You trade damage for increased range.

Range does not equal velocity though. With that kind of range, if a round moves too slow, you may as well be trying to pee on them. it will be very hard to hit a a moving mech, not impossible, but most players will not find a use for the AC 2/5. it will end up being a nitch weapon.

[Mason Grimm]

Victor Morson, on 13 April 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

AC5s have similar ranges to PPCs, for half the damage; AC2s only have a tiny few hex range advantage over other long-range weapons and definitely not enough to justify a weapon that does the damage of a small laser for 6 tons. If you look at LRMs, for example, you are talking several times as much damage for the same weight in the same range bracket. The same goes for other long range weapons; their TT damage/range is nearly as effective as you'd think due to range.

Really that's the size of it: They're overweight. If they had only weighed 3 tons or so, they'd probably been considered a decent weapon since you could put multiples on a 'mech. As it stands AC/2s and 5s weigh so much they become the "main gun" of 'mechs and take a lot out of them making their tiny range advantage not count for much.

Here is my take on AC2/AC5s versus the PPC since you used that in your analysis.

Some Like It Hot!

The PPC does 10 points of damage but COSTS 10 HEAT!!!!
The AC2/AC5 does 2 or 5 points of damage but COSTS 1 HEAT!!!!!

Sure the PPC does more damage than the AC rounds but guess what? You are paying for that instant damage with major waves of heat while with the AC you can do half the damage (using the AC5 as an example) with 1/10th the heat. This can allow you to run and gun, jump and gun, gun and gun, whatever you want.

Can You See What I See?

The PPC has a minimum range of 3
The AC2 has a minimum range of 4
The AC5 has a minimum range of 3

The PPC has an extreme range of 19-24
The AC2 has an extreme range of 25-32
The AC5 has an extreme range of 19-24

Clearly the AC2 beats out everything here. All things being equal on the maximum range (or better), and add that to the fact that you are using 1/10th of the heat, I would say the advantage clearly goes to AC rounds.

Bruce Lee Versus Mike Tyson

Now here is where we speculate.

PPCs are not insta-prime weapons. Energy must flow in to the capacitor and recharge the cap before the weapon is ready to fire again. Let us say this takes 60 seconds (since we don't know this is all speculation remember).

PPC Fire and Recharge time = 1 shot per 60 seconds = 10 damage per minute.

Autocannons can reload simply by ejecting a spent shell casing and reloading a new one by a feed mechanism (assuming they don't use caseless rounds). This wouldn't take 60 seconds on its worst day. Usually games have a fast reload time for smaller damage weapons like the AC2 etc. Let's say that is 10 seconds (and I am being VERY generous here for comparison purposes, it would probably be much faster).

AC2 Fire and Reload time = 1 shot per 10 seconds (6 shots per minute) = 12 damage per minute

DOT is king here. Insta-gib weapons are great like a Gauss Rifle and all that kind of stuff (but gauss has its own drawbacks like exploding capacitors if any part of the weapon is hit, huge tonnage requirements and huge critical space requirements).

Realistically I would imagine an AC2 to have a Reload time of somewhere between 2 and 5 seconds. That gives the AC2 the potential for doing 12 to 30 damage per minute versus the PPCs 10 (note: an a much longer extreme range).

The Aim Game

Sure PPCs do more damage but guess what, if you miss that shot you are toast for another 60 seconds until you recharge and can fire again.

AC2s and AC5s? If you miss that shot? Take another! And another! and another! and another! You are gonna start putting those rounds into the enemy target. This may not seem like much to an expereinced sniper who hits everything he aims at; one shot, one kill blah blah blah but in the thick of battle when you are doing the Circle of Death dance if you miss and he is pelting you with AC rounds while you recharge this will seem like an eternity.

Conclusion

6 of one, Half-Dozen of another. Same Shiznit, Different Pile.

AC Advantages: Longer ranges, less heat
AC Disadvantages: require ammunition, less damage per single round
Total: 2 Advantages (I'm leaving out Faster Rate of Fire) / 2 Disadvantages

PPC Advantages: More damage per shot, doesn't require ammo
PPC Disadvantages: Massive heat, less range
Total: 2 Advantages / 2 Disadvantages

[Mechteric]

Mason Grimm, on 13 April 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

*all that good stuff*

Spot on, and that really is a great thing about combat in the Battletech/Mechwarrior universe. Each weapon has its pros and cons in a mostly equally balanced way, which then is lent to the player to decide their preferred means of combat.

[Tadakuma]

It has been said but I think it needs to be reiterated that the main thing about the low cal ACs is they generate virtually no heat and have good range.

It's basically a medium laser, with long range that generates less heat then a medium laser. When you fighting lights and mediums that's enough to earn it's place on the battlefield.

If you're in a heavy then it's not you're only weapon. ON a heavy you don't use an AC 5 by itself, it is coupled with a PPC, LRMs or a Large laser. The low heat enables you to use other weapons as well as and maintain a good rate of fire.

In 3025 that's actually a pretty good thing. The Rifleman and Dragon have already been mentioned, but I think a better example is the
Zeus 6S Vs the Zeus 6T - AC 5, LRM 15 & Large Laser Vs PPC, LRM 15 and Large Laser seems like a no brainer but if you look at the heat generated VS damage it isn't as lopsided as you might think 6S 22 Damge (5+8+9 from the LRMS) & 14 Heat - Vs 27 (10-8-9) and 23 heat.

Put simply the 6S can fire everything every turn, while the 6T has to choose it's weapons. Over the first 8 turns of the battle (until the LRMs run out) the 6S actually has a better damage potential then the supposedly superior 6T.

Which designs is better, well probably the 6T but it's not as clear cut as people seem to think and the margin isn't as great as you would imagine.

[WithSilentWings]

CapperDeluxe, on 13 April 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

While its true in most prior Mechwarrior games these 2 AC's have been woefully underpowered, I think Mechwarrior Living Legends makes a somewhat decent case for their usefulness. They still aren't much use against heavy and assault mechs, but used against lights/mediums and aircraft they are quite potent, especially due to their range. Hopefully MWO can use a similar formula if not improve upon it.

I would be very happy if they work similarly to MWLL. I LOVE piloting the Mauler for the 4x AC2. We have to keep in mind that even the AC2 should be throwing 30mm or larger rounds either CM or HE, which have proven to be an effective weapon for destroying modern(ish) battle tanks in a large enough burst (like the 40 ton T72). We can argue "*whineeee* but battlemech armour is much stronger!" but then why can't we argue that in the future such weapons will be more potent as well...

I think the important thing with the AC is it needs to be depicted for what it typically is: a high-explosive cannon. In MW, MW3, MW4 et I don't recall hits from small ACs ever ending in any sort of blast...

Try keeping your cockpit still and retaliate with your ER weapons or gauss rifles when your reticule is dancing to the tune of my AC2 at 1000m.

[Victor Morson]

Mason Grimm, on 13 April 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

Here is my take on AC2/AC5s versus the PPC since you used that in your analysis.

Everything you said makes one really fatal assumption (well two, really): You won't have enough heat sinks to cover the bill. For the tonnage of ammo and guns on the light ACs you can easily add enough heat sinks to cover the entire thing while removing the possibility of ammo explosions in the process.

Plus, if we're talking cases where the 'mech isn't very warm anyway, again it's a moot issue. Case in point, the stock Dragon vs the Grand Dragon. The Grand Dragon is a far, far superior 'mech just by swapping the AC5 to a PPC, and it hardly suffers heat problems at all.

WithSilentWings, on 13 April 2012 - 05:39 AM, said:

I would be very happy if they work similarly to MWLL. I LOVE piloting the Mauler for the 4x AC2. We have to keep in mind that even the AC2 should be throwing 30mm or larger rounds either CM or HE, which have proven to be an effective weapon for destroying modern(ish) battle tanks in a large enough burst (like the 40 ton T72). We can argue "*whineeee* but battlemech armour is much stronger!" but then why can't we argue that in the future such weapons will be more potent as well...

Honestly that Mauler is pretty bad outside of being dedicated anti-air. Definitely not up to taking on other 'mechs in it's price range. It's stellar AA though, so I won't argue against it being a useful 'mech - if only MWO has air targets (even NPC driven ones), suddenly the AC2's worth goes way, way up.

The only solid anti-'mech mech in LL that sports light non-RACs AC is the Mark 2 boating Ultras. It does prove they're buffered considerably over their TT counterparts. That said, I've dualed these 'mechs before and a IS Awesome armed with PPCs can go toe-to-toe with them; the only fights I lost, I lost because I missed a couple vital shots (pilot error) and not because the Awesome is an inferior 'mech. By contrast, other Mark 2s could kick my ***.

Mason Grimm, on 13 April 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

PPC Advantages: More damage per shot, doesn't require ammo
PPC Disadvantages: Massive heat, less range
Total: 2 Advantages / 2 Disadvantages

I think it's worth nothing that a "number of advantages/disadvantages" does not necessarily mean anything if those advantages are massive.

I could make a case for a sling shot having more advantages than an M16, it doesn't mean I'd want one.

Slingshot Advantages: Very light weight, cheap, ammunition is plentiful and can be improvised, easily built, easy to maintain, easy to learn, can be used by children, legal to purchase and own, can be loaded with multiple projectiles in a single shot.

M16 Advantages: Shoots fast, Kills things.

Winner: Slingshot, the superior weapon!

Edited by Victor Morson, 13 April 2012 - 05:57 AM.

[WithSilentWings]

Victor Morson, on 13 April 2012 - 05:48 AM, said:

Everything you said makes one really fatal assumption (well two, really): You won't have enough heat sinks to cover the bill. For the tonnage of ammo and guns on the light ACs you can easily add enough heat sinks to cover the entire thing while removing the possibility of ammo explosions in the process.

Plus, if we're talking cases where the 'mech isn't very warm anyway, again it's a moot issue. Case in point, the stock Dragon vs the Grand Dragon. The Grand Dragon is a far, far superior 'mech just by swapping the AC5 to a PPC, and it hardly suffers heat problems at all.



Honestly that Mauler is pretty bad outside of being dedicated anti-air. Definitely not up to taking on other 'mechs in it's price range. It's stellar AA though, so I won't argue against it being a useful 'mech - if only MWO has air targets (even NPC driven ones), suddenly the AC2's worth goes way, way up.

The only solid anti-'mech mech in LL that sports light non-RACs AC is the Mark 2 boating Ultras. It does prove they're buffered considerably over their TT counterparts. That said, I've dualed these 'mechs before and a IS Awesome armed with PPCs can go toe-to-toe with them; the only fights I lost, I lost because I missed a couple vital shots (pilot error) and not because the Awesome is an inferior 'mech. By contrast, other Mark 2s could kick my ***.



I think it's worth nothing that a "number of advantages/disadvantages" does not necessarily mean anything if those advantages are massive.

I could make a case for a sling shot having more advantages than an M16, it doesn't mean I'd want one.

Slingshot Advantages: Very light weight, cheap, ammunition is plentiful and can be improvised, easily built, easy to maintain, easy to learn, can be used by children, legal to purchase and own, can be loaded with multiple projectiles in a single shot.

M16 Advantages: Shoots fast, Kills things.

Winner: Slingshot, the superior weapon!

The reason the Mauler does OK in anti-mech situations is because it makes your view dance around and fills your screen with explosions so it's very difficult to retaliate with slow firing weapons.

[T0RC4ED]

Im a huge fan of AC 2/5s. I use them as filler weapons for ranges between Gauss Rifle and Medium Laser. I also find them usefull as a weapon for when my heat is in the red. The fast recycle and low heat is a large part of why I like them. The IS versions are a little too heavy but ill use them to make do until I can get clan tech.

Final thought... Go ahead and miss me with that big ticket slow recycle weapon. I promise you won't get a chance to fire it again.

Edited by T0RC4ED, 13 April 2012 - 06:15 AM.

[Mason Grimm]

Victor Morson, on 13 April 2012 - 05:48 AM, said:

Everything you said makes one really fatal assumption (well two, really): You won't have enough heat sinks to cover the bill. For the tonnage of ammo and guns on the light ACs you can easily add enough heat sinks to cover the entire thing while removing the possibility of ammo explosions in the process.

Plus, if we're talking cases where the 'mech isn't very warm anyway, again it's a moot issue. Case in point, the stock Dragon vs the Grand Dragon. The Grand Dragon is a far, far superior 'mech just by swapping the AC5 to a PPC, and it hardly suffers heat problems at all.

Nothing about my assumptions are fatal. It all comes down to play style.

AC2 + Ammo = long range sniper mech, fire support role, overwatch. Not some in the mix point blank brawler.

"Oh, but what if you get hit and your ammo explodes."

If you can hit me from 29 hex away (or whatever the meter equiv is) then you are using equally vulnerable equipment with similar (if not exactly the same) drawbacks. Also, I can eject my ammo if I need to go in close or am worried about someone crit seeking me.

Again, 6 of one, Half a Dozen of the other.

"Oh, but where you put ammo I could put heat sinks to cover the heat bill and I won't explode"

Ok, that covers your heat bill. You've used up an extra 5-10 tons (and appropriate critical spaces) for some extra heat sinks. How do you compensate for the slower RoF? You are still dealing less DoT than someone with ACs even if you are able to compensate for the heat. Remember, DHS aren't super super common yet.

"Oh, but what about the Dragon versus the Grand Dragon. They upgraded to PPCs cause they are better"

Right. They slapped an ERPPC on that Grand Dragon and it has DHS as well. Unsure if they are integrated into the fusion reactor or added after the fact. If they were slapped on after then they take up 3 critical spaces.

Anyways, to make all that magic happen they slapped in an XL engine which turns your ERPPC weilding monster in to a glass cannon. One hit to any of those engine critical slots and POOF your monster has become a shiny paperweight.. Both the Dragon and the Grand Dragon are protected by 10 tons of armor so there was no added protection for that XL.

The point is; its all about checks and balances. Ballistics and Beams are balanced; depending on role and player preference.

Quote

I think it's worth nothing that a "number of advantages/disadvantages" does not necessarily mean anything if those advantages are massive.

I could make a case for a sling shot having more advantages than an M16, it doesn't mean I'd want one.

Slingshot Advantages: Very light weight, cheap, ammunition is plentiful and can be improvised, easily built, easy to maintain, easy to learn, can be used by children, legal to purchase and own, can be loaded with multiple projectiles in a single shot.

M16 Advantages: Shoots fast, Kills things.

Winner: Slingshot, the superior weapon!

But we aren't talking about M16s and Slingshots. We are talking about PPCs and AC2/AC5s. Point of fact is that you haven't made a sustainable arguement for your claims. Now you are just being silly.

[whiskey tango foxtrot]

Why not both.......it's the American way.

[Omigir]

OMG! math and analysis and proof!

Why would you guys bring in proof!?

: ( this thread scares me *escapes it quickly!*

[Samuel Maxwell]

When I first heard that there would be Role Warfare and Commanders and Scouts are two of the roles, I thought that the Scout would report the location to the Commander and the Commander would send an airstrike to hit the targeted 'mech.

In this speculative scenario, the AC2/5 would be serving multiple purposes. We know that players can buy modules for their Battlemech, so maybe one of the modules would be calling airstrikes (seeing that bombarding missiles was another hypothetical-but-potentially-real module). And while we know that missiles can't be shot down because there would be too many of them as noted in a thread, perhaps shooting down aerospace fighters wouldn't be such a problem.

I'm sure everything canon has already been stated and without the addition of aerospace fighters, I don't think anyone with a strong position plans on changing their minds without the game being released.

[Victor Morson]

Mason Grimm, on 13 April 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

Nothing about my assumptions are fatal. It all comes down to play style.

AC2 + Ammo = long range sniper mech, fire support role, overwatch. Not some in the mix point blank brawler.

LRM + Ammo = Long range sniper mech, fire support role, overwatch. Does 5 times as much damage for 1 ton less.

I could keep citing examples, but is it really needed? The AC/2 is terrible at it's role, let alone any other role.

[AlanEsh]

Mason Grimm, on 13 April 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

PPC Fire and Recharge time = 1 shot per 60 seconds = 10 damage per minute.

AC2 Fire and Reload time = 1 shot per 10 seconds (6 shots per minute) = 12 damage per minute

Aside from the FULL MINUTE to recharge the PPC, yeah, sure this is the crux of it.
If you give the AC2 this much advantage (firing 6 times more often than the PPC) it will match up. Let's hope the devs take a page from the MW games here, rather than from TT rules.

[Hollister]

If they are using TT rules.

A/C2 x 2 + 4 tons ammo = 16 tons and 360 points of damage
Thats 180 rounds of ammo, lots of sustained fire power down range

Innersphere Guass Rifle + 1 ton ammo = 16 tons and 120 points of damage
8 rounds of ammo, better not miss.

Take a guess which one im going to take.

A/C2 also has more range then a guass rifle.

Victor Morson, on 13 April 2012 - 05:48 AM, said:

I could make a case for a sling shot having more advantages than an M16, it doesn't mean I'd want one.

Slingshot Advantages: Very light weight, cheap, ammunition is plentiful and can be improvised, easily built, easy to maintain, easy to learn, can be used by children, legal to purchase and own, can be loaded with multiple projectiles in a single shot.

M16 Advantages: Shoots fast, Kills things.

Winner: Slingshot, the superior weapon!

M16's are legal to purchase and own where i live, so that all depends really.

Edited by Hollister, 13 April 2012 - 06:43 AM.

[Samuel Maxwell]

Angelicon, on 13 April 2012 - 06:27 AM, said:

If you give the AC2 this much advantage (firing 6 times more often than the PPC) it will match up. Let's hope the devs take a page from the MW games here, rather than from TT rules.

I have a problem with this quote, particularly because it's very explicit in saying that the AC2 needs to be nerfed from TT and hence required to be buffed in MWO.

While I do agree that 60 seconds is awfully long in a video game, we can still shorten it to, say, five seconds. For the AC2 then, it could be .83 seconds. This is much more reasonable yet still keeps the proportion correct. I'm still assuming that the arguments is whether or not the AC2 and AC5 needs to be buffed or not.

[Mason Grimm]

Victor Morson, on 13 April 2012 - 06:25 AM, said:

LRM + Ammo = Long range sniper mech, fire support role, overwatch. Does 5 times as much damage for 1 ton less.

I could keep citing examples, but is it really needed? The AC/2 is terrible at it's role, let alone any other role.

*cough*

Does POTENTIALLY 5x the damage.

In actuality (relative term considering its a game); Using the TT rules it can do between 6 points of damage and 20 points of damage as you have to roll to see how many missiles hit. How this would translate to the MWO game I don't know but I highly doubt they will say "Wow? You got a lock? Thats an automatic 20 missiles hit".

Also, not every missile hits a single location. In TT they go in groupings of 5 pts of damage per hit location (again, you have to roll for that). This translates in to missiles being a great support / grind 'em down weapon but not an insta-gib weapon.

Apples to oranges my man, apples to oranges.